Clinton VP news LATEST: Podesta now calling the losers to tell them its not them

[Gustaf]

How is Gingrich agreeable?

[Gustaf]

While Morden is right, I'd just like to highlight that it's incorrect  that Clinton lost the 2008 primary due to being too conservative.

[Gustaf]

Christie seems like an awful pick. He's not helping Trump in a solidly Democratic state in a solidly Democratic region.

As a Governor he doesn't bring any foreign policy or military experience to the ticket either.

And as a corrupt politician from a corrupt state he undermines Trump's whole Crooked Hillary, anti-establishment line.

[Gustaf]

Is anything known on Flynn's positions on other topics? Economy, trade, health care, social issues? If he's a Democrat, he may appeal to moderates and more liberal voters who dislike Hilldog.

Nothing is really known about Trump's positions on any issues so I doubt it matters.

[Gustaf]

Is anything known on Flynn's positions on other topics? Economy, trade, health care, social issues? If he's a Democrat, he may appeal to moderates and more liberal voters who dislike Hilldog.

Nothing is really known about Trump's positions on any issues so I doubt it matters.

Uh, yeah, of course. There are tons of interviews by TRUMP.

I just meant that since he constantly contradicts himself and changes his mind back and forth we don't actually know anything about them.

[Gustaf]

All very true. But you're missing the "first, do no harm" part of any VP pick.

Now, I am very far left, but to me picking Kaine signals that Clinton plans to run (and govern) as Republican lite. Even moreso than Obama.

That is pretty unacceptable to me and raises my chances of staying home or "throwing away my vote" astronomically, even if it may mean Trump winning. If significant numbers of likely voters share me views on this Kaine becomes a risky pick.

Not voting for Clinton is a vote for Trump. I respect your feelings on this, and I share them in a way. But you have to realize it's going to be either her or Trump; no matter how well a third party *might* do, it will not be enough to win. So would you rather have her or him?

Clinton is not a perfect candidate, and she is not the most ideal choice for president. But she is leagues beyond Trump.

I rest my case .

Eh.

I think Clinton rallying around the base causes substantially less harm than picking a moderate.

Left wingers who are currently not convinced (who DO exist) will not be convinced by more comparison of Clinton to Trump, with no positive reason to vote for her. They're leaning towards staying home.  Moderates currently picking Clinton as the lesser of two evils will either continue to do so, or simply not vote. Trump gains no votes if Clinton picks Warren,  and Clinton loses votes if she picks Kaine.

But this may not even be the most salient point. Having a progressive in the administration is going to be very important if Clinton seeks to govern at all AFTER the election. If she's confident that she can win in a tight race against Trumpence (a pretty reasonable assumption IMHO) would she rather have a progressive ambassador in the Naval Observatory, or a stuffed centrist shirt who can't do anything?


EDIT: This is of course colored by the fact that I'm in the population of people watching Clinton's VP pick to see if I can vote for her. 

All of Sanders' work in getting that progressive platform (the most progressive ever!) meant nothing to you?